AUSTIN - Voting for the second time in two weeks to restrict the rights of homosexuals, the Texas House on Monday approved a measure to lock into the state constitution a ban on same-sex marriages and civil unions.

After often-impassioned debate, the amendment was approved 101-29, winning one more vote than the 100 necessary for approval of a constitutional amendment. Speaker Tom Craddick, who rarely votes, cast a ballot for the proposal, and eight other House members abstained.

The measure now goes to the Senate, where its fate in the closing weeks of the legislative session is unknown. If approved by two-thirds of the senators, it will be put on the ballot, probably next fall, for approval or rejection by Texas voters.

Texas already has a law against same-sex marriages. Supporters of the amendment said it was necessary to put the prohibition into the constitution to head off the courthouse fights over same-sex unions that have erupted in other states.

Thompson, 66, an African-American who grew up with segregation, said the legislation reminded her of the time when interracial marriages were illegal.

"When people of my color used to marry someone of Mr. Chisum's color (white), you'd often find people of my color hanging from a tree. That's what white people back then did to protect marriage," Thompson said.

Last week, the House voted to prohibit gays from becoming foster parents. That provision was added to a bill overhauling the state's Child Protective Services system.

The foster parent ban may be doomed in the Senate, where the sponsor of the CPS overhaul, Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, said the restriction may present both legal and practical challenges at a time when many children are waiting for foster care.

No sponsor yet in Senate

But the constitutional amendment against same-sex marriages may stay alive in the Senate. Chisum doesn't have a Senate sponsor yet, but the Senate two years ago approved a similar law prohibiting the recognition of same-sex unions from any other state.

Spokesman Mark Miner said Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who presides over the Senate, hadn't seen the final language of the House amendment.

"He supports the concept of marriage between a man and a woman," Miner said.

More than 200 witnesses spoke against the same-sex marriage ban in a hearing before the House State Affairs Committee that stretched late into the night on April 4. A week later, the panel approved an amendment to ban same-sex marriages but rejected a broader proposal also banning so-called civil unions.

Chisum resurrected the broader proposal during debate by the full House on Monday.

The amendment defines marriage as a union involving one man and one woman and prohibits the state or any local government from creating or recognizing "any legal status identical or similar to marriage," such as civil unions.

Chisum said the amendment wouldn't affect common-law marriages because such liaisons involve one man and one woman.

Chisum also disputed opponents who argued that the legislation would wipe out existing agreements providing health insurance, hospital visitation and other rights among same-sex domestic partners.

"This would not negate or set aside any contract an employer may want to make with his employees," Chisum said.

Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston, said the measure left a "big question mark" over insurance coverage and other contractual rights of same-sex couples.

Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, said the amendment "queers — or confuses — our equal rights amendment," which also is in the state constitution, by discriminating against one group of people.

"This is not about marriage," he said, noting same-sex marriages already are illegal in Texas. "This is about writing discrimination into the constitution."

Three hours of debate

After almost three hours of heated debate, Chisum attempted to cool tempers.

"If I've offended anybody, you have my apologies. I love each and every one of you," he said.

Kathy Miller, president of the nonpartisan Texas Freedom Network, said the "unnecessary and divisive vote limits the rights of all unmarried Texans, gay or straight, and it is a diversion from the real issues facing working families."